AGO 1991-012.

Case DateApril 03, 1991
CourtConnecticut
Connecticut Attorney General Opinions 1991. AGO 1991-012. April 3, 1991Opinion No. 1991-012Honorable Gerald N. TirozziDepartment of Education165 Capital AvenueHartford, CT 06106 Dear Commissioner Tirozzi: We are writing in response to your letter of February 19, 1991 in which you request our advice concerning whether certain physicians and psychologists, who serve as "medical consultants" and "psychological/psychiatric consultants'' to the Division of Rehabilitation Services and who are hired pursuant to personal services agreements, are immune from personal liability pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes § 4-165. For the reasons discussed below, it is our opinion that these physicians and psychologists are immune from liability under the conditions set forth in that statute. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 4-165 provides in part:
No state officer or employee shall be personally liable for damage or injury, not wanton, reckless or malicious, caused in the discharge of his duties or within the scope of his employment. Any person having a complaint for such damage or injury shall present it as a claim against the state under the provisions of this chapter.
In addition, state officers and employees are entitled to indemnification against any financial loss or expense arising from the discharge of their duties as long as their actions are not wanton, reckless or malicious. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 5-141d. In such claims state officers and employees are entitled to a defense provided by the state. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 5-141d. For purposes of the protections afforded by Conn. Gen. Stat. § 4-165, the key issue is the definition of a "state officer or employee" which is found in Conn. Gen. Stat. § 4-141. That definition includes "every person elected or appointed to or employed in any office, position or post in the state government, whatever his title, classification, or function and whether he serves with or without remuneration or compensation" and specifically includes "any physicians or psychologists employed by any state agency." Conn. Gen. Stat. § 4-141. Although at least one superior court decision has held that mere status as a physician under contract to a state agency is enough to warrant inclusion as a "State employee" for purposes of immunity from personal liability under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 4-165,1 in each instance where we have...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT